Recorded audio and motion picture media has been an aspect of society since the days of Thomas Edison. At the start of the 20th century there was wide distribution of recorded audio media (cylinders and records) and motion picture media (nickelodeons and movies), but both technologies were still in their infancy. In the late 1920s motion pictures were combined with audio on a mass-market basis, followed by color motion pictures with audio. Radio broadcasting gradually evolved into a largely advertising-supported form of broadcast mass-market audio media. When a television (TV) broadcast standard was established in the mid-1940s, television joined radio as a form of broadcast mass-market media bringing previously recorded or live motion pictures into the home.
By the middle of the 20th century, a large percentage of US homes had phonograph record players for playing recorded audio media, a radio to receive live broadcast audio, and a television set to play live broadcast audio I video (AN) media. Very often these 3 “media players” (record player, radio and TV) were combined into one cabinet sharing common speakers that became the “media center” for the home. Although the media choices were limited to the consumer, the media “ecosystem” was quite stable. Most consumers knew how to use the “media players” and were able to enjoy the full extent of their capabilities. At the same time, the publishers of the media (largely the motion picture and televisions studios, and the music companies) were able to distribute their media both to theaters and to the home without suffering from widespread piracy or “second sales”, i.e., the resale of used media. Typically publishers do not derive revenue from second sales, and as such, it reduces revenue that publishers might otherwise derive from the buyer of used media for new sales. Although there certainly were used records sold during the middle of the 20th century, such sales did not have a large impact on record publishers because, unlike a motion picture or video program—which is typically watched once or only a few times by an adult—a music track may be listened to hundreds or even thousands of times. So, music media is far less “perishable” (i.e., it has lasting value to an adult consumer) than motion picture/video media. Once a record was purchased, if the consumer liked the music, the consumer was likely to keep it a long time.
From the middle of the 20th century through the present day, the media ecosystem has undergone a series of radical changes, both to the benefit and the detriment of consumers and publishers. With the widespread introduction of audio recorders, especially cassette tapes with high-quality stereo sound, there certainly was a higher degree of consumer convenience. But it also marked the beginning of what is now a widespread practice with consumer media: piracy. Certainly, many consumers used the cassette tapes for taping their own records purely for convenience, but increasingly consumers (e.g., students in a dormitory with ready access to each others' record collections) would make pirated copies. Also, consumers would tape music played over the radio rather than buying a record or tape from the publisher.
The advent of the consumer VCR led to even more consumer convenience, since now a VCR could be set to record a TV show which could be watched at a later time, and it also led to the creation of the video rental business, where movies as well as TV programming could be accessed on an “on demand” basis. The rapid development of mass-market home media devices since the mid-1980s has led to an unprecedented level of choice and convenience for the consumer, and also has led to a rapid expansion of the media publishing market.
Today, consumers are faced with a plethora of media choices as well as a plethora of media devices, many of which are tied to particular forms of media or particular publishers. An avid consumer of media may have a stack of devices connected to TVs and computers in various rooms of the house, resulting in a “rat's nest” of cables to one or more TV sets and/or personal computers (PCs) as well as a group of remote controls. (In the context of the present application, the term “personal computer” or “PC” refers to any sort of computer suitable for us in the home or office, including a desktop, a Macintosh® or other non-Windows computers, Windows-compatible devices, UNIX variations, laptops, etc.) These devices may include a video game console, VCR, DVD player, audio surround-sound processor/amplifier, satellite set-top box, cable TV set-top box, etc. And, for an avid consumer, there may be multiple similar-function devices because of compatibility issues. For example, a consumer may own both a HD-DVD and a Blu-ray DVD player, or both a Microsoft Xbox® and a Sony Playstation® video game system. Indeed, because of incompatibility of some games across versions of game consoles, the consumer may own both an XBox and a later version, such as an Xbox 360®. Frequently, consumers are befuddled as to which video input and which remote to use. Even after a disc is placed into the correct player (e.g., DVD, HD-DVD, Blu-ray, Xbox or Playstation), the video and audio input is selected for that the device, and the correct remote control is found, the consumer is still faced with technical challenges. For example, in the case of a wide-screen DVD, the user may need to first determine and then set the correct aspect ratio on his TV or monitor screen (e.g., 4:3, Full, Zoom, Wide Zoom, Cinema Wide, etc.). Similarly, the user may need to first determine and then set the correct audio surround sound system format (e.g., AC-3, Dolby Digital, DTS, etc.). Often times, the consumer is unaware that they may not be enjoying the media content to the full capability of their television or audio system (e.g., watching a movie squashed at the wrong aspect ratio, or listening to audio in stereo rather than in surround sound).
Increasingly, Internet-based media devices have been added to the stack of devices. Audio devices like the Sonos® Digital Music system stream audio directly from the Internet. Likewise, devices like the Slingbox™ entertainment player record video and stream it through a home network or out through the Internet where it can be watched remotely on a PC. And Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) services offer cable TV-like services through Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) or other home Internet connections. There have also been recent efforts to integrate multiple media functions into a single device, such as the Moxi® Media Center and PCs running Windows XP Media Center Edition. While each of these devices offers an element of convenience for the functions that it performs, each lacks ubiquitous and simple access to most media. Further, such devices frequently cost hundreds of dollars to manufacture, often because of the need for expensive processing and/or local storage. Additionally, these modem consumer electronic devices typically consume a great deal of power, even while idle, which means they are expensive over time and wasteful of energy resources. For example, a device may continue to operate if the consumer neglects to turn it off or switches to a different video input. And, because none of the devices is a complete solution, it must be integrated with the other stack of devices in the home, which still leaves the user with a rat's nest of wires and a sea of remote controls.
Furthermore, when many newer Internet-based devices do work properly, they typically offer media in a more generic form than it might otherwise be available. For example, devices that stream video through the Internet often stream just the video material, not the interactive “extras” that often accompany DVDs, like the “making of” videos, games, or director's commentary. This is due to the fact that frequently the interactive material is produced in a particular format intended for a particular device that handles interactivity locally. For example, each of DVD, HD-DVDs and Blu-ray discs have their own particular interactive format. Any home media device or local computer that might be developed to support all of the popular formats would require a level of sophistication and flexibility that would likely make it prohibitively expensive and complex for the consumer to operate.
Adding to the problem, if a new format were introduced later in the future the local device may not have the hardware capability to support the new format, which would mean that the consumer would have to purchase an upgraded local media device. For example, if higher-resolution video or stereoscopic video (e.g., one video stream for each eye) were introduced at a later date, the local device may not have the computational capability to decode the video, or it may not have the hardware to output the video in the new format (e.g., assuming stereoscopy is achieved through 120 fps video synchronized with shuttered glasses, with 60 fps delivered to each eye, if the consumer's video hardware can only support 60 fps video, this option would be unavailable absent an upgraded hardware purchase).
The issue of media device obsolescence and complexity is a serious problem when it comes to sophisticated interactive media, especially video games.
Modern video game applications are largely divided into four major non-portable hardware platforms: Sony PlayStation® 1, 2 and 3 (PS1, PS2, and PS3); Microsoft Xbox® and Xbox 360®; and Nintendo Gamecube® and Wii™; and PC-based games. Each of these platforms is different than the others so that games written to run on one platform usually do not run on another platform. There may also be compatibility problems from one generation of device to the next. Even though the majority of software game developers create software games that are designed independent of a particular platform, in order to run a particular game on a specific platform a proprietary layer of software (frequently called a “game development engine”) is needed to adapt the game for use on a specific platform. Each platform is sold to the consumer as a “console” (i.e., a standalone box attached to a TV or monitor/speakers) or it is a PC itself. Typically, the video games are sold on optical media such as a Blu-ray DVD, DVD-ROM or CD-ROM, which contains the video game embodied as a sophisticated real-time software application. As home broadband speeds have increased, video games are becoming increasingly available for download.
The specificity requirements to achieve platform-compatibility with video game software is extremely exacting due to the real-time nature and high computational requirements of advanced video games. For example, one might expect full game compatibility from one generation to the next of video games (e.g., from XBox to XBox 360, or from Playstation 2 (“PS2”) to Playstation 3 (“PS3”), just as there is general compatibility of productivity applications (e.g., Microsoft Word) from one PC to another with a faster processing unit or core. However, this is not the case with video games. Because the video game manufacturers typically are seeking the highest possible performance for a given price point when a video game generation is released, dramatic architectural changes to the system are frequently made such that many games written for the prior generation system do not work on the later generation system. For example, XBox was based upon the x86-family of processors, whereas XBox 360 was based upon a PowerPC-family.
Techniques can be utilized to emulate a prior architecture, but given that video games are real-time applications, it is often unfeasible to achieve the exact same behavior in an emulation. This is a detriment to the consumer, the video game console manufacturer and the video game software publisher. For the consumer, it means the necessity of keeping both an old and new generation of video game consoles hooked up to the TV to be able to play all games. For the console manufacturer it means cost associated with emulation and slower adoption of new consoles. And for the publisher it means that multiple versions of new games may have to be released in order to reach all potential consumers—not only releasing a version for each brand of video game (e.g., XBox, Playstation), but often a version for each version of a given brand (e.g., PS2 and PS3). For example, a separate version of Electronic Arts' “Madden NFL 08” was developed for XBox, XBox 360, PS2, PS3, Gamecube, Wii, and PC, among other platforms.
Portable devices, such as cellular (“cell”) phones and portable media players also present challenges to game developers. Increasingly such devices are connected to wireless data networks and are able to download video games. But, there are a wide variety of cell phones and media devices in the market, with a wide range of different display resolutions and computing capabilities. Also, because such devices typically have power consumption, cost and weight constraints, they typically lack advanced graphics acceleration hardware like a Graphics Processing Unit (“GPU”), such as devices made by NVIDIA of Santa Clara, Calif. Consequently, game software developers typically develop a given game title simultaneously for many different types of portable devices. A user may find that a given game title is not available for his particular cell phone or portable media player.
In the case of home game consoles, hardware platform manufacturers typically charge a royalty to the software game developers for the ability to publish a game on their platform. Cell phone wireless carriers also typically charge a royalty to the game publisher to download a game into the cell phone. In the case of PC games, there is no royalty paid to publish games, but game developers typically face high costs due to the higher customer service burden to support the wide range of PC configurations and installation issues that may arise. Also, PCs typically present less barriers to the piracy of game software since they are readily reprogrammable by a technically-knowledgeable user and games can be more easily pirated and more easily distributed (e.g., through the Internet). Thus, for a software game developer, there are costs and disadvantages in publishing on game consoles, cell phones and PCs.
For game publishers of console and PC software, costs do not end there. To distribute games through retail channels, publishers charge a wholesale price below the selling price for the retailer to have a profit margin. The publisher also typically has to pay the cost of manufacturing and distributing the physical media holding the game. The publisher is also frequently charged a “price protection fee” by the retailer to cover possible contingencies such as where the game does not sell, or if the game's price is reduced, or if the retailer must refund part or all of the wholesale price and/or take the game back from a buyer. Additionally, retailers also typically charge fees to publishers to help market the games in advertising flyers. Furthermore, retailers are increasingly buying back games from users who have finished playing them, and then sell them as used games, typically sharing none of the used game revenue with the game publisher. Adding to the cost burden placed upon game publishers is the fact that games are often pirated and distributed through the Internet for users to download and make free copies.
As Internet broadband speeds have been increasing and broadband connectivity has become more widespread in the US and worldwide, particularly to the home and to Internet “cafes” where Internet-connected PCs are rented, games are increasingly being distributed via downloads to PCs or consoles. Also, broadband connections are increasingly used for playing multiplayer and massively multiplayer online games (both of which are referred to in the present disclosure by the acronym “MMOG”). These changes mitigate some of the costs and issues associated with retail distribution. Downloading online games addresses some of the disadvantages to game publishers in that distribution costs typically are less and there are little or no costs from unsold media. But downloaded games are still subject to piracy, and because of their size (often many gigabytes in size) they can take a very long time to download. In addition, multiple games can fill up small disk drives, such as those sold with portable computers or with video game consoles. However, to the extent games or MMOGs require an online connection for the game to be playable, the piracy problem is mitigated since the user is usually required to have a valid user account. Unlike linear media (e.g., video and music) which can be copied by a camera shooting video of the display screen or a microphone recording audio from the speakers, each video game experience is unique, and can not be copied using simple video/audio recording. Thus, even in regions where copyright laws are not strongly enforced and piracy is rampant, MMOGs can be shielded from piracy and therefore a business can be supported. For example, Vivendi SA's “World of Warcraft” MMOG has been successfully deployed without suffering from piracy throughout the world. And many online or MMOG games, such as Linden Lab's “Second Life” MMOG generate revenue for the games' operators through economic models built into the games where assets can be bought, sold, and even created using online tools. Thus, mechanisms in addition to conventional game software purchases or subscriptions can be used to pay for the use of online games.
While piracy can be often mitigated due to the nature of online or MMOGs, online game operator still face remaining challenges. Many games require substantial local (i.e., in-home) processing resources for online or MMOGs to work properly. If a user has a low performance local computer (e.g., one without a GPU, such as a low-end laptop), he may not be able to play the game. Additionally, as game consoles age, they fall further behind the state-of-the-art and may not be able to handle more advanced games. Even assuming the user's local PC is able to handle the computational requirements of a game, there are often installation complexities. There may be driver incompatibilities (e.g., if a new game is downloaded, it may install a new version of a graphics driver that renders a previously-installed game, reliant upon an old version of the graphics driver, inoperable). A console may run out of local disk space as more games are downloaded. Complex games typically receive downloaded patches over time from the game developer as bugs are found and fixed, or if modifications are made to the game (e.g., if the game developer finds that a level of the game is too hard or too easy to play). These patches require new downloads. But sometimes not all users complete downloading of all the patches. Other times, the downloaded patches introduce other compatibility or disk space consumption issues.
Also, during game play, large data downloads may be required to provide graphics or behavioral information to the local PC or console. For example, if the user enters a room in a MMOG and encounters a scene or a character made up of graphics data or with behaviors that are not available on the user's local machine, then that scene or character's data must be downloaded. This may result in a substantial delay during game play if the Internet connection is not fast enough. And, if the encountered scene or character requires storage space or computational capability beyond that of the local PC or console, it can create a situation where the user can not proceed in the game, or must continue with reduced-quality graphics. Thus, online or MMOG games often limit their storage and/or computational complexity requirements. Additionally, they often limit the amount of data transfers during the game. Online or MMOG games may also narrow the market of users that can play the games.
Furthermore, technically-knowledgeable users are increasingly reverse-engineering local copies of games and modifying the games so that they can cheat. The cheats maybe as simple as making a button press repeat faster than is humanly possible (e.g., so as to shoot a gun very rapidly). In games that support in-game asset transactions the cheating can reach a level of sophistication that results in fraudulent transactions involving assets of actual economic value. When an online or MMOGs economic model is based on such asset transactions, this can result in substantial detrimental consequences to the game operators.
The cost of developing a new game has grown as PCs and consoles are able to produce increasingly sophisticated games (e.g., with more realistic graphics, such as real-time ray-tracing, and more realistic behaviors, such as real-time physics simulation). In the early days of the video game industry, video game development was a very similar process to application software development; that is, most of the development cost was in the development of the software, as opposed to the development of the graphical, audio, and behavioral elements or “assets”, such as those that may be developed for a motion picture with extensive special effects. Today, many sophisticated video game development efforts more closely resemble special effects-rich motion picture development than software development. For instance, many video games provide simulations of 3-D worlds, and generate increasingly photorealistic (i.e., computer graphics that seem as realistic as live action imagery shot photographically) characters, props, and environments. One of the most challenging aspects of photorealistic game development is creating a computer-generated human face that is indistinguishable from a live action human face. Facial capture technologies such Contour™ Reality Capture developed by Mova of San Francisco, Calif. captures and tracks the precise geometry of a performer's face at high resolution while it is in motion. This technology allows a 3D face to be rendered on a PC or game console that is virtually indistinguishable from a captured live action face. Capturing and rendering a “photoreal” human face precisely is useful in several respects. First, highly recognizable celebrities or athletes are often used in video games (often hired at a high cost), and imperfections may be apparent to the user, making the viewing experience distracting or unpleasant. Frequently, a high degree of detail is required to achieve a high degree of photorealism—requiring the rendering of a large number of polygons and high-resolution textures, potentially with the polygons and/or textures changing on a frame-by-frame basis as the face moves.
When high polygon-count scenes with detailed textures change rapidly, the PC or game console supporting the game may not have sufficient RAM to store enough polygon and texture data for the required number of animation frames generated in the game segment. Further, the single optical drive or single disk drive typically available on a PC or game console is usually much slower than the RAM, and typically can not keep up with the maximum data rate that the GPU can accept in rendering polygons and textures. Current games typically load most of the polygons and textures into RAM, which means that a given scene is largely limited in complexity and duration by the capacity of the RAM. In the case of facial animation, for example, this may limit a PC or a game console to either a low resolution face that is not photoreal, or to a photoreal face that can only be animated for a limited number of frames, before the game pauses, and loads polygons and textures (and other data) for more frames.
Watching a progress bar move slowly across the screen as a PC or console displays a message similar to “Loading . . . ” is accepted as an inherent drawback by today's users of complex video games. The delay while the next scene loads from the disk (“disk” herein, unless otherwise qualified, refers to non-volatile optical or magnetic media, as well non-disk media such as semiconductor “Flash” memory) can take several seconds or even several minutes. This is a waste of time and can be quite frustrating to a game player. As previously discussed, much or all of the delay may be due to the load time for polygon, textures or other data from a disk, but it also may be the case that part of the load time is spent while the processor and/or GPU in the PC or console prepares data for the scene. For example, a soccer video game may allow the players to choose among a large number of players, teams, stadiums and weather conditions. So, depending on what particular combination is chosen, different polygons, textures and other data (collectively “objects”) may be required for the scene (e.g., different teams have different colors and patterns on their uniforms). It may be possible to enumerate many or all of the various permutations and pre-compute many or all of the objects in advance and store the objects on the disk used to store the game. But, if the number of permutations is large, the amount of storage required for all of the objects may be too large to fit on the disk (or too impractical to download). Thus, existing PC and console systems are typically constrained in both the complexity and play duration of given scenes and suffer from long load times for complex scenes.
Another significant limitation with prior art video game systems and application software systems is that they are increasingly using large databases, e.g., of 3D objects such as polygons and textures, that need to be loaded into the PC or game console for processing. As discussed above, such databases can take a long time to load when stored locally on a disk. Load time, however, is usually far more severe if the database is stored a remote location and is accessed through the Internet. In such a situation it may take minutes, hours, or even days to download a large database. Further, such databases are often created a great expense (e.g., a 3D model of a detailed tall-masted sailing ship for use in a game, movie, or historical documentary) and are intended for sale to the local end-user. However, the database is at risk of being pirated once it has been downloaded to the local user. In many cases, a user wants to download a database simply for the sake of evaluating it to see if it suits the user's needs (e.g., if a 3D costume for a game character has a satisfactory appearance or look when the user performs a particular move). A long load time can be a deterrent for the user evaluating the 3D database before deciding to make a purchase.
Similar issues occur in MMOGs, particularly as games that allow users to utilize increasingly customized characters. For a PC or game console to display a character it needs to have access to the database of 3D geometry (polygons, textures, etc.) as well as behaviors (e.g., if the character has a shield, whether the shield is strong enough to deflect a spear or not) for that character. Typically, when a MMOG is first played by a user, a large number of databases for characters are already available with the initial copy of the game, which is available locally on the game's optical disk or downloaded to a disk. But, as the game progresses, if the user encounters a character or object whose database is not available locally (e.g., if another user has created a customized character), before that character or object can be displayed, its database must be downloaded. This can result in a substantial delay of the game.
Given the sophistication and complexity of video games, another challenge for video game developers and publishers with prior art video game consoles, is that it frequently takes 2 to 3 years to develop a video game at a cost of tens of millions of dollars. Given that new video game console platforms are introduced at a rate of roughly once every five years, game developers need to start development work on those games years in advance of the release of the new game console in order to have video games available concurrently when the new platform is released. Several consoles from competing manufactures are sometimes released around the same time (e.g., within a year or two of each other), but what remains to be seen is the popularity of each console, e.g., which console will produce the largest video game software sales. For example, in a recent console cycle, the Microsoft XBox 360, the Sony Playstation 3, and the Nintendo Wii were scheduled to be introduced around the same general timeframe. But years before the introductions the game developers essentially had to “place their bets” on which console platforms would be more successful than others, and devote their development resources accordingly. Motion picture production companies also have to apportion their limited production resources based on what they estimate to be the likely success of a movie well in advance of the release of the movie. Given the growing level of investment required for video games, game production is increasingly becoming like motion picture production, and game production companies routinely devote their production resources based on their estimate of the future success of a particular video game. But, unlike they motion picture companies, this bet is not simply based on the success of the production itself; rather, it is predicated on the success of the game console the game is intended to run on. Releasing the game on multiple consoles at once may mitigate the risk, but this additional effort increases cost, and frequently delays the actual release of the game.
Application software and user environments on PCs are becoming more computationally intensive, dynamic and interactive, not only to make them more visually appealing to users, but also to make them more useful and intuitive. For example, both the new Windows Vista™ operating system and successive versions of the Macintosh™ operating system incorporate visual animation effects. Advanced graphics tools such as Maya™ from Autodesk, Inc., provide very sophisticated 3D rendering and animation capability which push the limits of state-of-the-art CPUs and GPUs. However, the computational requirements of these new tools create a number of practical issues for users and software developers of such products.
Since the visual display of an operating system (OS) must work on a wide range of classes of computers—including prior-generation computers no longer sold, but still upgradeable with the new OS—the OS graphical requirements are limited to a large degree by a least common denominator of computers that the OS is targeted for, which typically includes computers that do not include a GPU. This severely limits the graphics capability of the OS. Furthermore, battery-powered portably computers (e.g., laptops) limit the visual display capability since high computational activity in a CPU or GPU typically results in higher power consumption and shorter battery life. Portable computers typically include software that automatically lowers processor activity to reduce power consumption when the processor is not utilized. In some computer models the user may lower processor activity manually. For example, Sony's VGN-SZ280P laptop contains a switch labeled “Stamina” on one side (for low performance, more battery life) and “Speed” on the other (for high performance, less battery life). An OS running on a portable computer must be able to function usably even in the event the computer is running at a fraction of its peak performance capability. Thus, OS graphics performance often remains far below the state-of-the-art available computational capability.
High-end computationally-intense applications like Maya are frequently sold with the expectation that they will be used on high-performance PCs. This typically establishes a much higher performance, and more expensive and less portable, least common denominator requirement. As a consequence, such applications have a much more limited target audience than a general purpose OS (or general purpose productivity application, like Microsoft Office) and typically sell in much lower volume than general purpose OS software or general purpose application software. The potential audience is further limited because often times it is difficult for a prospective user to try out such computationally-intense applications in advance. For example, suppose a student wants to learn how to use Maya or a potential buyer already knowledgeable about such applications wants to try out Maya before making the investment in the purchase (which may well involve also buying a high-end computer capable of running Maya). While either the student or the potential buyer could download, or get a physical media copy of, a demo version of Maya, if they lack a computer capable of running Maya to its full potential (e.g., handling a complex 3D scene), then they will be unable to make an fully-informed assessment of the product. This substantially limits the audience for such high-end applications. It also contributes to a high selling price since the development cost is usually amortized across a much smaller number of purchases than those of a general-purpose application.
High-priced applications also create more incentive for individuals and businesses to use pirated copies of the application software. As a result, high-end application software suffers from rampant piracy, despite significant efforts by publishers of such software to mitigate such piracy through various techniques. Still, even when using pirated high-end applications, users cannot obviate the need to invest in expensive state-of-the-art PCs to run the pirated copies. So, while they may obtain use of a software application for a fraction of its actual retail price, users of pirated software are still required to purchase or obtain an expensive PC in order to fully utilize the application.
The same is true for users of high-performance pirated video games. Although pirates may get the games at fraction of their actual price, they are still required to purchase expensive computing hardware (e.g., a GPU-enhanced PC, or a high-end video game console like the XBox 360) needed to properly play the game. Given that video games are typically a pastime for consumers, the additional cost for a high-end video game system can be prohibitive. This situation is worse in countries (e.g., China) where the average annual income of workers currently is quite low relative to that of the United States. As a result, a much smaller percentage of the population owns a high-end video game system or a high-end PC. In such countries, “Internet cafes”, in which users pay a fee to use a computer connected to the Internet, are quite common. Frequently, such Internet cafes have older model or low-end PCs without high performance features, such as a GPU, which might otherwise enable players to play computationally-intensive video games. This is a key factor in the success of games that run on low-end PCs, such as Vivendi's “World of Warcraft” which is highly successful in China, and is commonly played in Internet cafes there. In contrast, a computationally-intensive game, like “Second Life” is much less likely to be playable on a PC installed in a Chinese Internet café. Such games are virtually inaccessible to users who only have access to low-performance PCs in Internet cafes.
Barriers also exist for users who are considering purchasing a video game and would first like to try out a demonstration version of the game by downloading the demo through the Internet to their home. A video game demo is often a full-fledged version of the game with some features disabled, or with limits placed on the amount of game play. This may involve a long process (perhaps hours) of downloading gigabytes of data before the game can be installed and executed on either a PC or a console. In the case of a PC, it may also involve figuring out what special drivers are needed (e.g., DirectX or OpenGL drivers) for the game, downloading the correct version, installing them, and then determining whether the PC is capable of playing the game. This latter step may involve determining whether the PC has enough processing (CPU and GPU) capability, sufficient RAM, and a compatible OS (e.g., some games run on Windows XP, but not Vista). Thus, after a long process of attempting to run a video game demo, the user may well find out that the video game demo can't be possibly played, given the user's PC configuration. Worse, once the user has downloaded new drivers in order to try the demo, these driver versions may be incompatible with other games or applications the user uses regularly on the PC, thus the installation of a demo may render previously operable games or applications inoperable. Not only are these barriers frustrating for the user, but they create barriers for video game software publishers and video game developers to market their games.
Another problem that results in economic inefficiency has to do with the fact that given PC or game console is usually designed to accommodate a certain level of performance requirement for applications and/or games. For example, some PCs have more or less RAM, slower or faster CPUs, and slower or faster GPUs, if they have a GPUs at all. Some games or applications make take advantage of the full computing power of a given PC or console, while many games or applications do not. If a user's choice of game or application falls short of the peak performance capabilities of the local PC or console, then the user may have wasted money on the PC or console for unutilized features. In the case of a console, the console manufacturer may have paid more than was necessary to subsidize the console cost.
Another problem that exists in the marketing and enjoyment of video games involves allowing a user to watch others playing games before the user commits to the purchase of that game. Several prior art approaches exist for the recording of video games for replay at a later time. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,558,339 teaches recording game state information, including game controller actions, during “gameplay” in the video game client computer (owned by the same or different user). This state information can be used at a later time to replay some or all of the game action on a video game client computer (e.g., PC or console). A significant drawback to this approach is that for a user to view the recorded game, the user must possess a video game client computer capable of playing the game and must have the video game application running on that computer, such that the gameplay is identical when the recorded game state is replayed. Beyond that, the video game application has to be written in such a way that there is no possible execution difference between the recorded game and the played back game.
For example, game graphics are generally computed on a frame-by-frame basis. For many games, the game logic sometimes may take shorter or longer than one frame time to compute the graphics displayed for the next frame, depending on whether the scene is particularly complex, or if there are other delays that slow down execution (e.g., on a PC, another process may be running that takes away CPU cycles from the game applications). In such a game, a “threshold” frame that is computed in slightly less than one frame time (say a few CPU clock cycles less) can eventually occur. When that same scene is computed again using the exact same game state information, it could easily take a few CPU clock cycles more than one frame time (e.g., if an internal CPU bus is slightly out of phase with the an external DRAM bus and it introduces a few CPU cycle times of delay, even if there is no large delay from another process taking away milliseconds of CPU time from game processing). Therefore, when the game is played back the frame gets calculated in two frame times rather than a single frame time. Some behaviors are based on how often the game calculates a new frame (e.g., when the game samples the input from the game controllers). While the game is played, this discrepancy in the time reference for different behaviors does not impact game play, but it can result in the played-back game producing a different result. For example, if a basketball's ballistics are calculated at a steady 60 fps rate, but the game controller input is sampled based on rate of computed frames, the rate of computed frames may be 53 fps when the game was recorded, but 52 fps when the game is replayed, which can make the difference between whether the basketball is blocked from going into the basket or not, resulting in a different outcome. Thus, using game state to record video games requires very careful game software design to ensure that the replay, using the same game state information, produces the exact same outcome.
Another prior art approach for recording video game is to simply record the video output of a PC or video game system (e.g., to a VCR, DVD recorder, or to a video capture board on a PC). The video then can be rewound and replayed, or alternatively, the recorded video uploaded to the Internet, typically after being compressed. A disadvantage to this approach is that when a 3D game sequence is played back, the user is limited to viewing the sequence from only the point of view from which the sequence was recorded. In other words, the user cannot change the point of view of the scene.
Further, when compressed video of a recorded game sequence played on a home PC or game console is made available to other users through the Internet, even if the video is compressed in real-time, it may be impossible to upload the compressed video in real-time to the Internet. The reason why is because many homes in the world that are connected to the Internet have highly asymmetric broadband connections (e.g., DSL and cable modem typically have far higher downstream bandwidth than upstream bandwidth). Compressed high resolution video sequences often have higher bandwidths than the upstream bandwidth capacity of the network, making them impossible to upload in real-time. Thus, there would be a significant delay after the game sequence is played (perhaps minutes or even hours) before another user on the Internet would be able to view the game. Although this delay is tolerable in certain situations (e.g., to watch a game player's accomplishments that occurred at a prior time), it eliminates the ability to watch a game live (e.g., a basketball tournament, played by champion players) or with “instant replay” capability as the game is played live.
Another prior art approach allows a viewer with a television receiver to watch video games live, but only under the control of the television production crew. Some television channels, in both the US and in other countries provide video game viewing channels, where the television viewing audience is able to watch certain video game users (e.g., top-rated players playing in tournaments) on video game channels. This is accomplished by having the video output of the video game systems (PCs and/or consoles) fed into the video distribution and processing equipment for the television channel. This is not unlike when the television channel is broadcasting a live basketball game in which several cameras provide live feeds from different angles around the basketball court. The television channel then is able to make use of their video/audio processing and effects equipment to manipulate the output from the various video game systems. For example, the television channel can overlay text on top of the video from a video game that indicates the status of different players (just as they might overlay text during a live basketball game), and the television channel can overdub audio from a commentator who can discuss the action occurring during the games. Additionally, the video game output can be combined with cameras recording video of the actual players of the games (e.g., showing their emotional response to the game).
One problem with this approach is that such live video feeds must be available to the television channel's video distribution and processing equipment in real-time in order for it to have the excitement of a live broadcast. As previously discussed, however, this is often impossible when the video game system is running from the home, especially if part of the broadcast includes live video from a camera that is capturing real-world video of the game player. Further, in a tournament situation, there is a concern that an in-home gamer may modify the game and cheat, as previously described. For these reasons, such video game broadcasts on television channels are often arranged with players and video game systems aggregated at a common location (e.g., at a television studio or in an arena) where the television production equipment can accept video feeds from multiple video game systems and potentially live cameras.
Although such prior art video game television channels can provide a very exciting presentation to the television viewing audience that is an experience akin to a live sporting event, e.g., with the video game players presented as “athletes”, both in terms of their actions in the video game world, and in terms of their actions in the real world, these video game systems are often limited to situations where players are in close physical proximity to one another. And, since television channels are broadcasted, each broadcasted channel can only show one video stream, which is selected by the television channel's production crew. Because of these limitations and the high cost of broadcast time, production equipment and production crews, such television channels typically only show top-rated players playing in top tournaments.
Additionally, a given television channel broadcasting a full-screen image of a video game to the entire television viewing audience shows only one video game at a time. This severely limits a television viewer's choices. For example, a television viewer may not be interested in the game(s) shown at a given time. Another viewer may only be interested in watching the game play of a particular player that is not featured by the television channel at a given time. In other cases, a viewer may only be interested in watching a how an expert player handles a particular level in a game. Still other viewers may wish to control the viewpoint that a video game is seen from, which is different from that chosen by the production team, etc. In short, a television viewer may have a myriad of preferences in watching video games that are not accommodated by the particular broadcast of a television network, even if several different television channels are available. For all of the aforementioned reasons, prior art video game television channels have significant limitations in presenting video games to television viewers.
Another drawback of prior art video games systems and application software systems is that they are complex, and commonly suffer from errors, crashes and/or unintended and undesired behaviors (collectively, “bugs”). Although games and applications typically go through a debugging and tuning process (frequently called “Software Quality Assurance” or SQA) before release, almost invariably once the game or application is released to a wide audience in the field bugs crop up. Unfortunately, it is difficult for the software developer to identify and track down many of the bugs after release. It can be difficult for software developers to become aware of bugs. Even when they learn about a bug, there may only be a limited amount of information available to them to identify what caused the bug. For example, a user may call up a game developer's customer service line and leave a message stating that when playing the game, the screen started to flash, then changed to a solid blue color and the PC froze. That provides the SQA team with very little information useful in tracking down a bug. Some games or applications that are connected online can sometimes provide more information in certain cases. For example, a “watchdog” process can sometimes be used to monitor the game or application for “crashes”. The watchdog process can gather statistics about the status of the game or applications process (e.g., the status of the stack, of the memory usage, how far the game or applications has progressed, etc.) when it crashes and then upload that information to the SQA team via the Internet. But in a complex game or application, such information can take a very long time to decipher in order to accurately determine what the user was doing at the time of the crash. Even then, it may be impossible to determine what sequence of events led to the crash.
Yet another problem associated with PCs and game consoles is that they are subject to service issues which greatly inconvenience the consumer. Service issues also impact the manufacturer of the PC or game console since they typically are required to send a special box to safely ship the broken PC or console, and then incur the cost of repair if the PC or console is in warranty. The game or application software publisher can also be impacted by the loss of sales (or online service use) by PCs and/or consoles being in a state of repair.
FIG. 1 illustrates a prior art video gaming system such as a Sony Playstation® 3, Microsoft Xbox 360®, Nintendo Wii™, Windows-based personal computer or Apple Macintosh. Each of these systems includes a central processing unit (CPU) for executing program code, typically a graphical processing unit (GPU) for performing advanced graphical operations, and multiple forms of input/output (I/O) for communicating with external devices and users. For simplicity, these components are shown combined together as a single unit 100. The prior art video gaming system of FIG. 1 also is shown including an optical media drive 104 (e.g., a DVD-ROM drive); a hard drive 103 for storing video game program code and data; a network connection 105 for playing multi-player games, for downloading games, patches, demos or other media; a random access memory (RAM) 101 for storing program code currently being executed by the CPU/GPU 100; a game controller 106 for receiving input commands from the user during gameplay; and a display device 102 (e.g., a SDTV/HDTV or a computer monitor).
The prior art system shown in FIG. 1 suffers from several limitations. First, optical drives 104 and hard drives 103 tend to have much slower access speeds as compared to that of RAM 101. When working directly through RAM 101, the CPU/GPU 100 can, in practice, process far more polygons per second than is possible when the program code and data is read directly off of hard drive 103 or optical drive 104 due to the fact that RAM 101 generally has much higher bandwidth and does not suffer from the relatively long seek delays of disc mechanisms. But only a limited amount of RAM is provided in these prior art systems (e.g., 256-512 Mbytes). Therefore, a “Loading . . . ” sequence in which RAM 101 is periodically filled up with the data for the next scene of the video game is often required.
Some systems attempt to overlap the loading of the program code concurrently with the gameplay, but this can only be done when there is a known sequence of events (e.g., if a car is driving down a road, the geometry for the approaching buildings on the roadside can be loaded while the car is driving). For complex and/or rapid scene changes, this type of overlapping usually does not work. For example, in the case where the user is in the midst of a battle and RAM 101 is completely filled with data representing the objects within view at that moment, if the user moves the view rapidly to the left to view objects that are not presently loaded in RAM 101, a discontinuity in the action will result since there not be enough time to load the new objects from Hard Drive 103 or Optical Media 104 into RAM 101.
Another problem with the system of FIG. 1 arises due to limitations in the storage capacity of hard drives 103 and optical media 104. Although disk storage devices can be manufactured with a relatively large storage capacity (e.g., 50 gigabytes or more), they still do not provide enough storage capacity for certain scenarios encountered in current video games. For example, as previously mentioned, a soccer video game might allow the user to choose among dozens of teams, players and stadiums throughout the world. For each team, each player and each stadium a large number of texture maps and environment maps are needed to characterize the 3D surfaces in the world (e.g., each team has a unique jersey, with each requiring a unique texture map).
One technique used to address this latter problem is for the game to pre-compute texture and environment maps once they are selected by the user. This may involve a number of computationally-intensive processes, including decompressing images, 3D mapping, shading, organizing data structures, etc. As a result, there may be a delay for the user while the video game is performing these calculations. On way to reduce this delay, in principle, is to perform all of these computations—including every permutation of team, player roster, and stadium—when the game was originally developed. The released version of the game would then include all of this pre-processed data stored on optical media 104, or on one or more servers on the Internet with just the selected pre-processed data for a given team, player roster, stadium selection downloaded through the Internet to hard drive 103 when the user makes a selection. As a practical matter, however, such pre-loaded data of every permutation possible in game play could easily be terabytes of data, which is far in excess of the capacity of today's optical media devices. Furthermore, the data for a given team, player roster, stadium selection could easily be hundreds of megabytes of data or more. With a home network connection of, say, 10 Mbps, it would take longer to download this data through network connection 105 than it would to compute the data locally.
Thus, the prior art game architecture shown in FIG. 1 subjects the user to significant delays between major scene transitions of complex games.
Another problem with prior art approaches such as that shown in FIG. 1 is that over the years video games tend to become more advanced and require more CPU/GPU processing power. Thus, even assuming an unlimited amount of RAM, video games hardware requirements go beyond the peak level of processing power available in these systems. As a result, users are required to upgrade gaming hardware every few years to keep pace (or play newer games at lower quality levels). One consequence of the trend to ever more advanced video games is that video game playing machines for home use are typically economically inefficient because their cost is usually determined by the requirements of the highest performance game they can support. For example, an XBox 360 might be used to play a game like “Gears of War”, which demands a high performance CPU, GPU, and hundreds of megabytes of RAM, or the XBox 360 might be used to play Pac Man, a game from the 1970s that requires only kilobytes of RAM and a very low performance CPU. Indeed, an XBox 360 has enough computing power to host many simultaneous Pac Man games at once.
Video games machines are typically turned off for most of the hours of a week. According to a July 2006 Nielsen Entertainment study of active gamers 13 years and older, on average, active gamers spend fourteen hours/week playing console video games, or just 12% of the total hours in a week. This means that the average video game console is idle 88% of the time, which is an inefficient use of an expensive resource. This is particularly significant given that video game consoles are often subsidized by the manufacturer to bring down the purchase price (with the expectation that the subsidy will be earned back by royalties from future video game software purchases).
Video game consoles also incur costs associated with almost any consumer electronic device. For instance, the electronics and mechanisms of the systems need to be housed in an enclosure. The manufacturer needs to offer a service warranty. The retailer who sells the system needs to collect a margin on either the sale of the system and/or on the sale of video game software. All of these factors add to the cost of the video game console, which must either be subsidized by the manufacturer, passed along to the consumer, or both.
In addition, piracy is a major problem for the video game industry. The security mechanisms utilized on virtually every major video gaming system have been “cracked” over the years, resulting in unauthorized copying of video games. For example, the Xbox 360 security system was cracked in July 2006 and users are now able to download illegal copies online. Games that are downloadable (e.g., games for the PC or the Mac) are particularly vulnerable to piracy. In certain regions of the world where piracy is weakly policed there is essentially no viable market for standalone video game software because users can buy pirated copies as readily as legal copies for a tiny fraction of the cost. Also, in many parts of the world the cost of a game console is such a high percentage of income that even if piracy were controlled, few people could afford a state-of-the-art gaming system.
In addition, the used game market reduces revenue for the video game industry. When a user has become tired of a game, they can sell the game to a store which will resell the game to other users. This unauthorized but common practice significantly reduces revenues of game publishers. Similarly, a reduction in sales on the order of 50% commonly occurs when there is a platform transition every few years. This is because users stop buying games for the older platforms when they know that the newer version platform is about to be released (e.g., when Playstation 3 is about to be released, users stop buying Playstation 2 games). Combined, the loss of sales and increased development costs associated with the new platforms can have a very significant adverse impact on the profitability of game developers.
New game consoles are also very expensive. The Xbox 360, the Nintendo Wii, and the Sony Playstation 3 all retail for hundreds of dollars. High powered personal computer gaming systems can cost up to $8000. This represents a significant investment for users, particularly considering that the hardware becomes obsolete after a few years and the fact that many systems are purchased for children.
One approach to the foregoing problems is online gaming in which the gaming program code and data are hosted on a server and delivered to client machines on-demand as compressed video and audio streamed over a digital broadband network. Some companies such as G-Cluster in Finland (now a subsidiary of Japan's SOFTBANK Broadmedia) currently provide these services online. Similar gaming services have become available in local networks, such as those within hotels and offered by DSL and cable television providers. A major drawback of these systems is the problem of latency, i.e., the time it takes for a signal to travel to and from the game server, which is typically located in an operators “head-end”. Fast action video games (also known as “twitch” video games) require very low latency between the time the user performs an action with the game controller and the time the display screen is updated showing the result of the user action. Low latency is needed so that the user has the perception that the game is responding “instantly”. Users may be satisfied with different latency intervals depending on the type of game and the skill level of the user. For example, 100 ms of latency may be tolerable for a slow casual game (like backgammon) or a slow-action role playing game, but in a fast action game a latency in excess of 70 or 80 ms may cause the user to perform more poorly in the game, and thus is unacceptable. For instance, in a game that requires fast reaction time there is a sharp decline in accuracy as latency increases from 50 to 100 ms.
When a game or application server is installed in a nearby, controlled network environment, or one where the network path to the user is predictable and/or can tolerate bandwidth peaks, it is far easier to control latency, both in terms of maximum latency and in terms of the consistency of the latency (e.g., so the user observes steady motion from digital video streaming through the network). Such level of control can be achieved between a cable TV network head-end to a cable TV subscriber's home, or from a DSL central office to DSL subscriber's home, or in a commercial office Local Area Network (LAN) environment from a server or a user. Also, it is possible to obtain specially-graded point-to-point private connections between businesses which have guaranteed bandwidth and latency. But in a game or application system that hosts games in a server center connected to the general Internet and then streams compressed video to the user through a broadband connection, latency is incurred from many factors, resulting in severe limitations in the deployment of prior art systems.
In a typical broadband-connected home, a user may have a DSL or cable modem for broadband service. Such broadband services commonly incur as much as a 25 ms round-trip latency (and at times more) between the user's home and the general Internet. In addition, there are round-trip latencies incurred from routing data through the Internet to a server center. The latency through the Internet varies based on the route that the data is given and the delays it incurs as it is routed. In addition to routing delays, round-trip latency is also incurred due to the speed of light traveling through the optical fiber that interconnects most of the Internet. For example, for each 1000 miles, approximately 22 ms is incurred in round-trip latency due to the speed of light through the optical fiber and other overhead.
Additional latency can occur due to the data rate of the data streamed through the Internet. For example, if a user has DSL service that is sold as “6 Mbps DSL service”, in practice, the user will probably get less than 5 Mbps of downstream throughput at best, and will likely see the connection degrade periodically due to various factors such as congestion during peak load times at the Digital Subscriber Line Access Multiplexer (DSLAM). A similar issue can occur reducing a the data rate of a cable modem is used for a connection sold as “6 Mbps cable modem service” to far less than that, if there is congestion in the local shared coaxial cable looped through the neighborhood, or elsewhere in the cable modem system network. If data packets at a steady rate of 4 Mbps are streamed as one-way in User Datagram Protocol (UDP) format from a server center through such connections, if everything is working well, the data packets will pass through without incurring additional latency, but if there is congestion (or other impediments) and only 3.5 Mbps is available to stream data to the user, then in a typical situation either packets will be dropped, resulting in lost data, or packets will queue up at the point of congestion, until they can be sent, thereby introducing additional latency. Different points of congestion have different queuing capacity to hold delayed packets, so in some cases packets that can't make it through the congestion are dropped immediately. In other cases, several megabits of data are queued up and eventually be sent. But, in almost all cases, queues at points of congestion have capacity limits, and once those limits are exceeded, the queues will overflow and packets will be dropped. Thus, to avoid incurring additional latency (or worse, loss of packets), it is necessary to avoid exceeding the data rate capacity from the game or application server to the user.
Latency is also incurred by the time required to compress video in the server and decompress video in the client device. Latency is further incurred while a video game running on a server is calculating the next frame to be displayed. Currently available video compression algorithms suffer from either high data rates or high latency. For example, motion JPEG is an intraframe-only lossy compression algorithm that is characterized by low-latency. Each frame of video is compressed independently of each other frame of video. When a client device receives a frame of compressed motion JPEG video, it can immediately decompress the frame and display it, resulting in very low latency. But because each frame is compressed separately, the algorithm is unable to exploit similarities between successive frames, and as a result intraframe-only video compression algorithms suffer from very high data rates. For example, 60 fps (frames per second) 640×480 motion JPEG video may require 40 Mbps (megabits per second) or more of data. Such high data rates for such low resolution video windows would be prohibitively expensive in many broadband applications (and certainly for most consumer Internet-based applications). Further, because each frame is compressed independently, artifacts in the frames that may result from the lossy compression are likely to appear in different places in successive frames. This can results in what appears to the viewer as a moving visual artifacts when the video is decompressed.
Other compression algorithms, such as MPEG2, H.264 or VC9 from Microsoft Corporation as they are used in prior art configurations, can achieve high compression ratios, but at the cost of high latency. Such algorithms utilize interframe as well as intraframe compression. Periodically, such algorithms perform an intraframe-only compression of a frame. Such a frame is known as a key frame (typically referred to as an “I” frame). Then, these algorithms typically compare the I frame with both prior frames and successive frames. Rather than compressing the prior frames and successive frames independently, the algorithm determines what has changed in the image from the I frame to the prior and successive frames, and then stores those changes as what are called “B” frames for the changes preceding the I frame and “P” frames for the changes following the I frame. This results in much lower data rates than intraframe-only compression. But, it typically comes at the cost of higher latency. An I frame is typically much larger than a B or P frame (often 10 times larger), and as a result, it takes proportionately longer to transmit at a given data rate.
Consider, for example, a situation where the I frames are 10× the size of B and P frames, and there are 29 B frames+30 P frames=59 interframes for every single I intraframe, or 60 frames total for each “Group of Frames” (GOP). So, at 60 fps, there is 1 60-frame GOP each second. Suppose the transmission channel has a maximum data rate of 2 Mbps. To achieve the highest quality video in the channel, the compression algorithm would produce a 2 Mbps data stream, and given the above ratios, this would result in 2 Megabits (Mb)/(59+10)=30,394 bits per intraframe and 303,935 bits per I frame. When the compressed video stream is received by the decompression algorithm, in order for the video to play steadily, each frame needs to decompressed and displayed at a regular interval (e.g., 60 fps). To achieve this result, if any frame is subject to transmission latency, all of the frames need to be delayed by at least that latency, so the worst-case frame latency will define the latency for every video frame. The I frames introduce the longest transmission latencies since they are largest, and an entire I frame would have to be received before the I frame could be decompressed and displayed (or any interframe dependent on the I frame). Given that the channel data rate is 2 Mbps, it will take 303,935/2 Mb=145 ms to transmit an I frame.
An interframe video compression system as described above using a large percentage of the bandwidth of the transmission channel will be subject to long latencies due to the large size of an I frame relative to the average size of a frame. Or, to put it another way, while prior art interframe compression algorithms achieve a lower average per-frame data rate than intraframe-only compression algorithms (e.g., 2 Mbps vs. 40 Mbps), they still suffer from a high peak per-frame data rate (e.g., 303,935*60=18.2 Mbps) because of the large I frames. Bear in mind, though that the above analysis assumes that the P and B frames are all much smaller than the I frames. While this is generally true, it is not true for frames with high image complexity uncorrelated with the prior frame, high motion, or scene changes. In such situations, the P or B frames can become as large as I frames (if a P or B frame gets larger than an I frame, a sophisticated compression algorithm will typically “force” an I frame and replace the P or B frame with an I frame). So, I frame-sized data rate peaks can occur at any moment in a digital video stream. Thus, with compressed video, when the average video data rate approaches data rate capacity of the transmission channels (as is frequently the case, given the high data rate demands for video) the high peak data rates from I frames or large P or B frames result in a high frame latency.
Of course, the above discussion only characterizes the compression algorithm latency created by large B, P or I frames in a GOP. If B frames are used, the latency will be even higher. The reason why is because before a B frame can be displayed, all of the B frames after the B frame and the I frame must be received. Thus, in a group of picture (GOP) sequence such as BBBBBIPPPPPBBBBBIPPPPP, where there are 5 B frames before each I frame, the first B frame can not be displayed by the video decompressor until the subsequent B frames and I frame are received. So, if video is being streamed at 60 fps (i.e., 16.67 ms/frame), before the first B frame can be decompressed, five B frames and the I frame will take 16.67*6=100 ms to receive, no matter how fast the channel bandwidth is, and this is with just 5 B frames. Compressed video sequences with 30 B frames are quite common. And, at a low channel bandwidth like 2 Mbps, the latency impact caused by the size of the I frame is largely additive to the latency impact due to waiting for B frames to arrive. Thus, on a 2 Mbps channel, with a large number of B frames it is quite easy to exceed 500 ms of latency or more using prior art video compression technology. If B frames are not used (at the cost of a lower compression ratio for given quality level), the B frame latency is not incurred, but the latency caused by the peak frame sizes, described above, is still incurred.
The problem is exacerbated by very the nature of many video games. Video compression algorithms utilizing the GOP structure described above have been largely optimized for use with live video or motion picture material intended for passive viewing. Typically, the camera (whether a real camera, or a virtual camera in the case of a computer-generated animation) and scene is relatively steady, simply because if the camera or scene moves around too jerkily, the video or movie material is (a) typically unpleasant to watch and (b) if it is being watched, usually the viewer is not closely following the action when the camera jerks around suddenly (e.g., if the camera is bumped when shooting a child blowing out the candles on a birthday cake and suddenly jerks away from the cake and back again, the viewers are typically focused on the child and the cake, and disregard the brief interruption when the camera suddenly moves). In the case of a video interview, or a video teleconference, the camera may be held in a fixed position and not move at all, resulting in very few data peaks at all. But 3D high action video games are characterized by constant motion (e.g., consider a 3D racing, where the entire frame is in rapid motion for the duration of the race, or consider first-person shooters, where the virtual camera is constantly moving around jerkily). Such video games can result in frame sequences with large and frequent peaks where the user may need to clearly see what is happening during those sudden motions. As such, compression artifacts are far less tolerable in 3D high action video games. Thus, the video output of many video games, by their nature, produces a compressed video stream with very high and frequent peaks.
Given that users of fast-action video games have little tolerance for high latency, and given all of the above causes of latency, to date there have been limitations to server-hosted video games that stream video on the Internet. Further, users of applications that require a high degree of interactivity suffer from similar limitations if the applications are hosted on the general Internet and stream video. Such services require a network configuration in which the hosting servers are set up directly in a head end (in the case of cable broadband) or the central office (in the case of Digital Subscriber Lines (DSL)), or within a LAN (or on a specially-graded private connection) in a commercial setting, so that the route and distance from the client device to the server is controlled to minimize latency and peaks can be accommodated without incurring latency. LANs (typically rated at 100 Mbps-1 Gbps) and leased lines with adequate bandwidth typically can support peak bandwidth requirements (e.g., 18 Mbps peak bandwidth is a small fraction of a 100 Mbps LAN capacity).
Peak bandwidth requirements can also be accommodated by residential broadband infrastructure if special accommodations are made. For example, on a cable TV system, digital video traffic can be given dedicated bandwidth which can handle peaks, such as large I frames. And, on a DSL system, a higher speed DSL modem can be provisioned, allowing for high peaks, or a specially-graded connection can provisioned which can handle a higher data rates. But, conventional cable modem and DSL infrastructure attached to the general Internet have far less tolerance for peak bandwidth requirements for compressed video. So, online services that host video games or applications in server centers a long distance from the client devices, and then stream the compressed video output over the Internet through conventional residential broadband connections suffer from significant latency and peak bandwidth limitations—particularly with respect to games and applications which require very low latency (e.g., first person shooters and other multi-user, interactive action games, or applications requiring a fast response time).